My Economicshttp://me.vanelp.com/index.xml
Recent content on My EconomicsHugo -- gohugo.ioen-usMartin van ElpSun, 07 Feb 2016 21:30:00 +0100Patentshttp://me.vanelp.com/healthcare/patents/
Sun, 07 Feb 2016 21:30:00 +0100http://me.vanelp.com/healthcare/patents/<p>See for now: <a href="http://me.vanelp.com/post/halt-divisive-healthcare-patents/">Halt divisive healthcare patents</a></p>
Carbon taxhttp://me.vanelp.com/climate/carbon-tax/
Sun, 07 Feb 2016 21:30:00 +0100http://me.vanelp.com/climate/carbon-tax/<p>Many economists agree: we need a (global) carbon tax to fight climate change. Everything else is a second-best or worse solution. Why is this so evident to (neo-liberal) economists?</p>
<p>A carbon tax harnesses market forces to bring about change. When the production of carbon is properly taxed for the costs it causes elsewhere, the market can mostly take care of itself. Entrepreneurs and consumers will look for ways that save costs: with a carbon tax that will be less carbon. The higher the tax, the less carbon is produced.</p>
<p>The beauty of a carbon tax then is that if every country applies it, through intermediary use, the final user will bear the cost of carbon emission. Instead, we see subsidies and other indirect policies ruling the day. Investing in innovation and dissemination of sustainable technologies has its uses, but as an only course of action it is probably to little too late.</p>
<p>In that way, a carbon tax also prevents more experimental measures later on, like geoengineering with unforeseeable consequences.</p>
First, Break all the Ruleshttp://me.vanelp.com/books/first-break-all-the-rules/
Sun, 27 Aug 2017 20:00:00 +0100http://me.vanelp.com/books/first-break-all-the-rules/<p>The book <a href="http://www.gallup.com/press/176069/first-break-rules-world-greatest-managers-differently.aspx"><em>&ldquo;First, Break all the Rules&rdquo;</em></a>, by Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman (Gallup), tells you &ldquo;[w]hat the world&rsquo;s greatest managers do differently.&rdquo; Beneath their interesting insights.</p>
<ol>
<li><p><em>&ldquo;People don&rsquo;t change that much. <br />Don&rsquo;t waste time trying to put in what was left out. <br />Try to draw out what was left in. <br />That is hard enough.&rdquo;</em></p></li>
<li><p>Focus on basic needs first, like expectations and equipment. If you move onto lofty goals straightaway, without ensuring the basics, employees will suffer from <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altitude_sickness">mountain sickness</a>.</p></li>
<li><p>A manager acts as a <em>catalyst</em> between the employees&rsquo; talents and the customers&rsquo; needs, one employee at a time:</p>
<ul>
<li>&ldquo;Select for talent;</li>
<li>Define the right outcomes;</li>
<li>Focus on strengths;</li>
<li>Find the right fit.&rdquo;
<br/><br/></li>
</ul></li>
<li><p>Distinguish between skills and talents. Skills can be taught. Talents are innate. Beware of &lsquo;competencies&rsquo; that happen to lump skills and talents together.</p></li>
<li><p>The point of management &ldquo;is to focus people towards performance.&rdquo; Performance is defined as an outcome valued by an internal or external customer.</p></li>
<li><p>&ldquo;Don&rsquo;t let the creed overshadow the message.&rdquo; In other words: be wary of well-meaning incentives that might end up counterproductive.</p></li>
<li><p>The greatest managers find and focus on the strengths of each person. With that information they can &ldquo;manage by exception.&rdquo;</p></li>
<li><p>When a manager pays little attention to good behavior, thinking &ldquo;no news is good news&rdquo;, it will lead to this good behavior withering away.</p></li>
<li><p>The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle">Peter principle</a>: conventional wisdom gets people promoted to their level of incompetence.</p></li>
<li><p>&ldquo;[S]elf-discovery is the driving, guiding force for a healthy career.&rdquo;</p></li>
<li><p>Tough love. Don&rsquo;t get employees what they want, but what is right for them.</p></li>
<li><p>Expect this from a talented employee:</p>
<ul>
<li>&ldquo;Look in the mirror any chance you get;</li>
<li>Muse (each month);</li>
<li>Discover yourself;</li>
<li>Build your constituency;</li>
<li>Keep track;</li>
<li>Catch your peers doing something right.&rdquo;</li>
</ul></li>
</ol>
<p>Elsewhere online you will find the twelve questions to measure the strength of a workplace, according to Gallup. Share.</p>
Pricinghttp://me.vanelp.com/realestate/pricing/
Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:30:00 +0100http://me.vanelp.com/realestate/pricing/<p>When it comes to the price of something, like real estate, there are many things to consider. In most cases prices are eventually determined by the market. The price is where the owner is willing to part with its possession and the prospective buyer is willing to buy at. Both the prospective buyer and seller determine their maximum price. Depending on bargaining power, basically the potential to find another seller or buyer, the final price will lean more to that of buyer or the seller.</p>
<p>In real estate the value is determined by the value of the physical property, like how it can be put to use, and then the total value of that property in its location. Locations that are highly valued by many are scarce in several ways. The location can have specific geographic characteristics that cannot be copied, like a river delta with easy access to sea. Geography can also create scarcity like valleys in a mountainous area. Amenities valuable to users of a property are not in indefinite supply, as anything has a cost. Many amenities are in a concentrated location, mostly the agglomeration of a city. So locations with certain amenities are scarce in that way. Locations can be scarce too because planning dictates so.</p>
<p>When the government gives fiscal kickbacks, on mortgages for example, that means that buying a house becomes more attractive relative to renting. This attraction leads to relatively more and bigger houses, and relatively higher prices. When housing and locations are scarce this balance is more towards higher prices.</p>
<p>The value of the physical property would in most markets tend to the building costs. The building costs are determined by the costs of material and labor, and competition in the construction industry. Regulations can determine that certain measures must be taken, which raises the cost of the physical property.</p>
<p>Finally, that means that the value of the plot underneath the real estate is the residual value. The residual value is the total value minus the building costs of the physical property. The residual value says something about the value of the location. This is for example used to determine the added value of adding amenities to an area, as this is expressed in the residual value of neighboring real estate.</p>
Prisoner's dilemmahttp://me.vanelp.com/realestate/prisoners-dilemma/
Sun, 31 Jan 2016 18:30:00 +0100http://me.vanelp.com/realestate/prisoners-dilemma/
<p>The Prisoner’s dilemma is a famous subject in game theory, and beyond. Here I will first explain it in its simplest form and then its relevancy to real estate economics.</p>
<h2 id="explanation">Explanation</h2>
<p>The Prisoner’s dilemma, as a story, depicts two prisoner’s (I and II) that are interrogated separately. They are involved in the same crime and when they both keep their mouth shut to the police officer, ‘cooperate’, they face a one year sentence. If they both ‘defect’ and tell on each other, they both face a two year sentence. So, ‘cooperating’ is best for both. However, if one stays silent and the other tells on the one, the one gets a three year sentence and the other gets off with no sentence. This leads to the outcome that both defect and the worst outcome for them combined becomes reality. Why this happens will be explained further now.</p>
<table>
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="right"></th>
<th><strong>Cooperate</strong></th>
<th><strong>Defect</strong></th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="right"><strong>Cooperate</strong></td>
<td>1 ; 1</td>
<td>3 ; 0</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="right"><strong>Defect</strong></td>
<td>0 ; 3</td>
<td>2 ; 2</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>The Prisoner’s dilemma is depicted in the table above. The left column gives the actions of prisoner I and the top row that of prisoner II. The remaining four cells respectively give the prison sentence for prisoner I and II in each situation. So “3;0” means that prisoner I cooperates, prisoner II defects and that as a consequence I gets a 3 year sentence and II is set free. When prisoner I considers what to do he can assume two situations: prisoner II cooperates or defects. In the first situation, II cooperates, it is better to defect, because no sentence is better than 1 year. In the second situation, II defects, it is better to defect too, because 2 years is better than 3 years. So, regardless of what II does, it is always better to defect for I. Because the same holds the other way round, II will always defect too. So this makes the situation a dilemma, as the rational outcome, a total of 4 years in sentences, is also the worst possible total outcome.</p>
<h2 id="relevancy-for-real-estate">Relevancy for real estate</h2>
<p>The Prisoner’s dilemma is relevant to real estate because real estate stakeholders may find themselves in similar situations. For example, neighboring real estate owners might cooperate in improving their surroundings to raise their rental income. But there could be situations where the Prisoner’s dilemma applies: the best result is when both invest in these improvements, but each is better off free riding and letting the other party believe they will cooperate. In practice these owners might not invest the optimal amount, but a sub-optimal amount to hedge against a (partially) defecting neighbor. On the other hand, these owners can enter in a contract describing what each will do. Another option is retaliation: the best result in the Prisoner’s dilemma can become stable if both parties can retaliate in indefinite subgames (say: each year the owners decide again what they both will invest).</p>
<p>Another example is when municipalities compete for companies to operate facilities in their area. Often this is a special case of the Prisoner’s dilemma, also known as the <a href="http://me.vanelp.com/realestate/tragedy-of-the-commons">Tragedy of the commons</a>. Competition between municipalities, mostly, does not raise the number of companies. So it could be that municipalities hand out plots cheaper, or lower taxes, to attract companies while for all municipalities in total that means that plots, or taxes, merely raise less money. For all municipalities it is best to cooperate and prevent a race-to-the-bottom, but in practice the marginal benefit of attracting an extra company might be bigger than the cost. In that situation, again the worst outcome is also the rational outcome.</p>
<p>A way out in these situations is a so-called social planner that interferes to achieve the optimal outcome. This social planner can achieve the optimal outcome for example by getting parties to the table, ‘decreeing’ the preferred outcome or by fining parties that defect. Nobel Prize winner <a href="http://www.economist.com/node/21557717">Elinor Ostrom</a> has written extensively about governing these commons.</p>
<p><strong>Sources and more reading</strong><br>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner’s_dilemma">Wikipedia, Prisoner’s dilemma</a></p>
Rationinghttp://me.vanelp.com/realestate/rationing/
Sun, 31 Jan 2016 18:40:00 +0100http://me.vanelp.com/realestate/rationing/<p>When prices or rents are kept artificially low by regulations that basically means the market is rationed. The invisible hand of the market dictates that when prices drop, demand rises and supply drops. If the market was in equilibrium before (supply = demand) a forced price drop means future demand will exceed supply. Some of the demand will be disappointed.</p>
<p>Rationing occurs in real estate markets when the government for example sets a maximum rent for housing. In the Netherlands there is a points system that basically determines the maximum rent for smaller homes. This in practice means that, regardless of efforts of social housing corporations, the market cannot supply enough homes to fulfill demand. The consequence is that many people end up on waiting lists. For some properties in the strongest parts of the country the waiting list is longer than 10 years.</p>
<p>So, when by law real estate rents are kept artificially low this almost by definition leads to waiting lists. Instead of paying for reasonable housing in money, people have to pay in time on a waiting list; in the meantime live in a less desirable housing situation.</p>
Real estate dividendhttp://me.vanelp.com/realestate/real-estate-dividend/
Sat, 08 Aug 2015 16:00:00 +0100http://me.vanelp.com/realestate/real-estate-dividend/<p>The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_dividend">demographic dividend</a> of emerging economies is increasingly being contrasted with the aging of developed economies. While the demographic dividend is seen as an opportunity for economic growth (eg. putting a bulge of young people to work), an aging society is seen as an economic problem.</p>
<p>What seems to be overlooked is that real estate is impacted by the demographic dividend too. When the demographic dividend kicks in, demand for investment in housing and other property is peaking too. This means when economies grey, demand for new real estate drops as a lot of real estate has been built just recently. This creates a real estate dividend: relatively low investment in real estate follows a construction boom. This lower investment level (implicitly) eases the transition from demographic dividend to an aging society. The real estate dividend counteracts the future consequences of a demographic dividend.</p>
Rebound effecthttp://me.vanelp.com/realestate/rebound-effect/
Sun, 31 Jan 2016 18:42:00 +0100http://me.vanelp.com/realestate/rebound-effect/<p>The rebound effect is a counter response to the use of a good after its use becomes more efficient. For example after investing in energy efficiency or the introduction of a more efficient technology.</p>
<p>After investing in energy efficiency the cost of energy drops that much, that it again becomes attractive to use more of it. A new technology that increases efficiency, and thus lowers costs, could also cause the rebound effect. In that case the extra remaining income will be partially spend on energy use again.</p>
<p>Users of energy have, mostly unconsciously, a budget for energy use, which means the mathematically expected drop in costs will not be achieved. A drop in the price per unit raises demand for most goods and services. When through higher efficiency the use of something becomes cheaper, you expect the rebound effect to apply. People will raise the temperature from the heater because energy use became less costly.</p>
<p>Do the investments that were made play a role? In most cases only when the decision to invest is made. In many cases it is hard to fix prior behavior, in other words leave the heater at a lower temperature. Once the investment is made, that could be considered a sunk cost, which in principle does not influence subsequent decisions. That is another reason why the rebound effect is expected when people invest in energy efficiency.</p>
Sheltered sectorhttp://me.vanelp.com/realestate/sheltered-sector/
Sun, 31 Jan 2016 18:44:00 +0100http://me.vanelp.com/realestate/sheltered-sector/
<p>A sheltered sector is a sector that faces relatively weak foreign competition. Often this concerns services that are hard to export, like a haircut or the service in a restaurant. In theory you could travel to get these services, and for star restaurants this happens, but often that is too expensive. Production of goods competes relatively more with abroad because most goods can be transported at relatively low costs to the consumer.</p>
<p>Construction and real estate can be seen as sheltered sectors. Construction has a high labor intensity and a large portion of the value added is created at the construction site. While construction materials can be transported relatively easily from abroad, and construction workers, albeit more difficult, can move to work elsewhere, it is not easy (yet) to import a complete building.</p>
<h2 id="domestic-circumstances-a-strong-influence">Domestic circumstances a strong influence</h2>
<p>Being a sheltered sector means that if domestic demand rises for that sector’s goods or services that also means that employment in that sector rises. Leakage is low: only a small portion of the extra demand leaks abroad through imports.</p>
<p>A sheltered sector does not face much foreign competition, but also hardly profits from (higher) foreign demand. Demand shocks on the domestic market have a strong and direct impact on a sheltered sector. In most markets for goods this pressure would be lowered by imports or exports, but for goods and services of a sheltered that is not an option.</p>
<p>Lower demand in a sheltered sector initially leads to sharp price drops (and bankruptcies) en in the long run to lower employment in the sheltered sector. Higher demand initially leads to strong price rises and in the long run to higher employment in the sheltered sector.</p>
Steps and leapshttp://me.vanelp.com/climate/steps-and-leaps/
Sat, 27 Feb 2016 08:45:00 +0100http://me.vanelp.com/climate/steps-and-leaps/
<p>In some cases we can achieve sustainability by taking small steps, and in others by giant leaps. It is up to bright people to find the (societal) cost benefit optimum in each case. They should account for things like opportunity costs, lock-in effects / sunk costs, and feasibility.</p>
<p style="text-align: center; font-size:150%; font-style: italic">Sustainable development is in small steps and giant leaps.</p>
<p>For example, in the built environment we deal with situations where we need steps and others where we need leaps. We need steps in the existing building stock, because demolishing and rebuilding everything is unsustainable. We, at the same time, need leaps in the construction of new buildings to prevent us from getting locked up in soon-to-be-old technology. The same goes for other initiatives: some work best by incrementally changing behavior, while others need a launching customer to get off the ground.</p>
<p>What about the (needed) exponential growth of installed sustainable solutions? Both steps and leaps contribute to that. Generally speaking, small steps are taken when there is potential for many many steps. Many small steps together makes for exponential growth just as much as the fewer giant leaps in the most advanced parts of our society.</p>
<h1 id="references">References</h1>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/al_gore_the_case_for_optimism_on_climate_change">TED: The case for optimism on climate change</a></li>
</ul>
Stock and flow markethttp://me.vanelp.com/realestate/stock-and-flow-market/
Sun, 31 Jan 2016 18:46:00 +0100http://me.vanelp.com/realestate/stock-and-flow-market/<p>An important characteristic of the real estate market is that it is mostly composed of the present stock of buildings, a so called stock market. It differs from a flow market like agriculture where the stock is relatively low compared to annual turnover. This characteristic means that the real estate market can only slowly adjust to shocks in demand.</p>
<p>Because real estate is a stock market, the invisible hand of the market dictates that a downward demand shock has two effects. First, because the supply of buildings cannot easily adjust to this new reality, the only viable route is vacancy or a sharp drop in prices. When owners assume a temporary shock, vacancy might be feasible, but when the shock persists the price will drop. The second is that the relatively small flows that do adjust the building stock take most of the burden: construction drops strongly, more than the initial demand shock, and demolition rises strongly.</p>
Sunk costshttp://me.vanelp.com/realestate/sunk-costs/
Sun, 31 Jan 2016 18:48:00 +0100http://me.vanelp.com/realestate/sunk-costs/
<p>Sunk costs are costs that have been made and cannot be reversed. In the built environment this concerns building lots that have been bought and the construction costs of an existing building. In principle these costs ought not to influence subsequential decisions. Every subsequent decision should in itself be profit maximizing. That means that only the costs that are to be incurred after the decision matter. In many cases, but not always, that means it is more interesting to continue with existing possessions than to start anew.</p>
<p>When certain costs have been made, that should give a competitive advantage. This holds as the already incurred costs do not matter anymore in subsequent decisions. An existing office can lower its rent a lot more than an office that is not constructed yet. The new office only gets build if the construction costs are also covered by the rent. The threat of lower rents stemming from the existing building stock puts downwards pressure on new construction.</p>
<p>This kind of competition could be considered Stackelberg competition. In Stackelberg competition party A first determines by how much it will supply the market and after that party B decides. That means that party B takes into consideration the amount of supply already available from party A.</p>
<h2 id="reputation">Reputation</h2>
<p>In practice many people do seem to take sunk costs into account. When could it be rational to take sunks costs into consideration? To seem consistent to the outside world, it could be rational to consider these costs despite being theoretically irrelevant.</p>
<p>The actual question is: will people take me serious if I quit a project I invested so much in? If not, which means reputational damage, it means sunk costs do matter indirectly. In that case the reputation damage is the extra cost of quitting. The actual sunk costs still do not matter directly in that case. Although, the costs of reputation damage are probably higher when the sunk costs are higher.</p>
<p><strong>Sources and further reading</strong><br>
<a href="http://vita.mcafee.cc/PDF/SunkCostFolly.pdf">McAfee, R.P., Mialon, H.M., and Mialon S.H., 2007. Do Sunk Costs Matter?</a></p>
Tragedy of the commonshttp://me.vanelp.com/realestate/tragedy-of-the-commons/
Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:40:00 +0100http://me.vanelp.com/realestate/tragedy-of-the-commons/
<p>The Tragedy of the commons occurs in markets for common goods in which the invisible hand makes everyone worse off, instead of better. The reason is that it is impossible to exclude people from using a common good. This leads to over-exploitation of the common good.</p>
<p>The usual story explaining the Tragedy of the commons is as follows. Every day two ranchers bring their herds of sheep to a common pasture. A bigger herd means that its herder can earn more. However, if both herders expand their herds they may deplete the grass on the pasture. When that happens herds actually fetch less income for the herder. However, for each individual herder it is rational to expand its herd, because the marginal cost is lower than the marginal benefit. These individually rational decisions deteriorate the pasture so the sheep become undernourished and harder to sell. In the end, indeed, everyone is worse off.</p>
<p>More strategic behavior: <a href="http://me.vanelp.com/realestate/prisoners-dilemma">Prisoner’s dilemma</a></p>
<h2 id="tragedy-of-the-real-estate-market">Tragedy of the real estate market</h2>
<p>Space is more or less a common good and a factor in the ‘production’ of real estate (services). As space is a common good it runs the risk of over-exploitation. This for example might happen when municipalities compete for companies to operate facilities in their area. Competition between municipalities, mostly, does not raise the number of companies. So it could be that each individual municipality hands out plots cheaper, or lowers taxes, to attract companies. In the meanwhile for all municipalities in total that means that plots, or taxes, merely raise less money, just like the sheep became undernourished. For all municipalities it is best to cooperate and prevent a race-to-the-bottom, but in practice the marginal benefit of attracting an extra company might be bigger than the cost. The rational outcome in this real estate market is evidently not the optimal outcome.</p>
<p>A way out in these situations is a so-called social planner that interferes to achieve the optimal outcome. This social planner can achieve the optimal outcome for example by getting parties to the table, ‘decreeing’ the preferred outcome or by fining parties that do not cooperate. Nobel Prize winner <a href="http://www.economist.com/node/21557717">Elinor Ostrom</a> has written extensively about governing these commons.</p>
Stock market ups and downs 3http://me.vanelp.com/post/stock-market-ups-and-downs-3/
Tue, 02 Jan 2018 14:00:00 +0100http://me.vanelp.com/post/stock-market-ups-and-downs-3/<p>The stock market is down more often than you might think. Beneath I <a href="http://me.vanelp.com/post/stock-market-ups-and-downs-2/">repeat</a> a simply analysis, made in <a href="https://www.r-project.org/">R</a>, of two ETFs on the Dow Jones Industrial Average and S&amp;P 500 respectively. These indexes show how the stock market moved in a given year. Every red box in the graphs beneath depicts a year in which the trend was downward; green boxes depict years with an upward trend.</p>
<p>Conclusion: in the period 2002-2017, these indexes have a downward trend in about 1 out of 3 years.</p>
<p><center></p>
<p><img src="http://me.vanelp.com/images/stock-market-ups-and-downs-3/DJIA.png" alt="SPDR Dow Jones Industrial Average ETF" title="SPDR Dow Jones Industrial Average ETF" /></p>
<p><img src="http://me.vanelp.com/images/stock-market-ups-and-downs-3/SP500.png" alt="SPDR S&amp;P 500 ETF Trust" title="SPDR S&amp;P 500 ETF Trust" /></p>
<p></center></p>
<p>For those interested, the code is on <a href="https://github.com/martinvanelp/experiments/blob/321eac983163d420dc994eb874315a188d5a6302/ideas/stockmarket/GoogleFinance.R">Github</a>.</p>
Emancipation and causationhttp://me.vanelp.com/post/emancipation-and-causation/
Sun, 17 Sep 2017 16:00:00 +0100http://me.vanelp.com/post/emancipation-and-causation/
<p>In the Netherlands women hold fewer top positions than men. Moreover the distribution of top jobs across men and women seems to correlate with preferences for full-time and part-time work<sup class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:1"><a rel="footnote" href="#fn:1">1</a></sup>: women work more often in part-time jobs and might, supposedly, get off track to a top position. That is one explanation, but there are more.</p>
<h1 id="causation-causation">Causation, causation</h1>
<p>Another explanation is that women choose differently, given discrimination. If the odds of getting a top job are lower for women with equal talent, it will lead to a lower propensity to take up full-time work. Under discrimination the cost-benefit balance is different for women, and hence their choices differ from men. Different outcomes for men and women when choosing between full-time and part-time work, can actually support the notion of (perceived) discrimination against women.</p>
<p>To see how this works, in a stylized way, you can use the model beneath.<sup class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:2"><a rel="footnote" href="#fn:2">2</a></sup></p>
<iframe id="emancipation" src="http://martinvanelp.shinyapps.io/emancipation/" height="480" width="100%" frameborder="0"></iframe>
<h1 id="lessons">Lessons</h1>
<p>Some lessons from the model, given its assumptions:</p>
<ul>
<li>Under discrimination roughly two things happen:
<ol>
<li>women decide to work part-time more often, and</li>
<li>comparatively fewer women move on from full-time jobs to top positions.</li>
</ol></li>
<li>The less rewarding the top position compared to either the benefit of part-time work or the number of available top positions, the less people are inclined to work full-time.</li>
<li>There is interaction between rewards and discrimination against women. Under discrimination:
<ul>
<li>pushing for lower rewards for top positions drives women out;</li>
<li>pushing for higher rewards for part-time work drives women out.</li>
</ul></li>
</ul>
<div class="footnotes">
<hr />
<ol>
<li id="fn:1"><a href="https://www.rsm.nl/about-rsm/news/detail/6799-the-netherlands-down-three-places-in-global-gender-gap-index-2016/">The Netherlands down three places in “global gender gap index 2016”</a>
<a class="footnote-return" href="#fnref:1"><sup>[return]</sup></a></li>
<li id="fn:2"><a href="https://github.com/martinvanelp/emancipation">Model code @github</a>
<a class="footnote-return" href="#fnref:2"><sup>[return]</sup></a></li>
</ol>
</div>